On Thu, Jun 24, 1999 at 01:23:19PM +0930, Mark Newton wrote:
> > I've found FreeBSD to outperform NT-anything in any task you throw at the
> > machine from web service to Samba for file and print service for PCs
> > running Windows.
>
> Granted. Perhaps we're seeing an artifact of NT's developers focussing
> on optimizing their system for good benchmark performance rather than
> good real-world performance.
>
> 'twill be interesting to see the offical report to find out where the
> various strengths and weaknesses really are.
The weaknesses are obvious and well documented by Microsoft itself.
We have a customer that insisted on using NT for its webserver.
Yesterday we had trouble with the time stamp in the logs. It simply
stopped at a specific time. After that the timestamp was all the same.
The problem was:
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/q223/1/37.asp
"This problem can occur if the server runs for more than 49 days without
being restarted"
planck(1:327) $ uname -a
FreeBSD planck 2.2.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 2.2.1-RELEASE #0: Mon Jun 23
16:49:02 CEST 1997 root:/usr/src/sys/compile/CHDKERNEL i386
planck(1:328) $ uptime
6:39PM up 590 days, 22:04, 3 users, load averages: 0.01, 0.08, 0.07
***********
This server is NOT idling, it's acting (besides other things) as a radius
server servering some thousand dialins.
Do you need any other arguments?
\Maex
--
SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | Yeah, yo mama dresses
Research & Development | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | you funny and you need
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0 | a mouse to delete files
D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 |
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
